Income Tax

Addition confirmed for non filing of affidavit stating that assessee had not agreed for addition during assessment proceedings

Addition confirmed for non filing of affidavit stating that the assessee had not agreed for the addition during the assessment proceedings as stated in assessment order

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2452 (2018) 08 ITAT

The instant appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by CIT(A) in confirming disallowance of interest and PPF interest expenses.

The assessee had filed return of income electronically. Being a survey case, the case of assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee had claimed interest and PPF expenses against the disclosure of income during the survey.

The AO was of the view that since the disclosure was over and above regular income earned by the assessee, no expenses could be claimed out of the said undisclosed income. It was recorded by the AO in the assessment order that the issue about disclosure and admissibility of the expenditure had been discussed with the AR of the assessee, and the AR agreed for the addition.

The AO accordingly made an addition.

The CIT(A) observed that as per the assessment order, the AR of the appellant had agreed for the proposed addition during the assessment proceedings. However, the appellant had not made any submission on this account during the appellate proceedings. In absence of any evidences filed, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO in making the disallowance and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

On consideration of the above facts and circumstances, the Tribunal observed that authorised representative of the assessee has admitted the proposed adition before the AO. However, no affidavit had been filed before the CIT(A) deposing therein that the AR of the assessee had not admitted the addition before the AO without his permission nor affidavit of the authorized representative had been filed stating therein that he had not agreed to before the AO about the above addition.

Therefore, in view of the concurrent finding of the both the authorities below indicating that this addition was admitted by the assessee, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Date of digital signature and issue determines date of a notice u/s 148 of Income Tax Act

Date of digital signature and issuance determines the date of a notice u/s148 of the Income Tax Act - ITAT…

1 day ago
  • DGFT

DGFT authorises IACCIA to issue Certificate of Origin (Non- Preferential)

DGFT authorises IACCIA to issue Certificate of Origin (Non- Preferential) w.e.f. 9th January 2026 In exercise of powers conferred under…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Net profit rate may not have variation commensurate to increase of turnover

Net profit rate may not per se experience variation commensurate to the increase of turnover. In a recent judgment, Allahabad…

1 day ago
  • Excise/Custom

Mushroom growing apparatus cannot be classified as ‘agricultural machinery’

Mushroom growing apparatus cannot be classified as ‘agricultural machinery’ under Customs Tariff Heading 8436. In a recent judgment, Hon'ble Supreme…

2 days ago
  • negotiable instrument act

Statutory presumption attached to issuance of a cheque to be accorded due weight – SC

Statutory presumption attached to issuance of a cheque, being one made in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability,…

2 days ago
  • tender

Highest bid can’t be discarded on mere expectation of even more higher bid

Merely because the authority conducting auction expects higher bid than the highest bidder is no reason to discard the highest…

2 days ago